Some people believe government should spend money on building train and subway lines to reduce traffic congestion. Others think that building more and wider roads is the better way to reduce traffic congestion.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.
While a number of people believe that the authorities should invest money to build train and subway systems to tackle the overcrowding, the others argue that the greater solution to reduce the heavy traffic is construct and expand more roads. This essay will examine both views and give my opinion.
To begin, public transport such as train and subway lines is the effective and efficient methods to solve traffic congestion. First, when the resident use public transport, the amount of cars on the roads certainly decrease and reduce traffic congestion. Even just half of people who using car on a daily basis change to using train or subway, the traffic congestion is not a huge issue anymore. The next positive of this solution is passengers might have several options instead of solely using cars or bikes.
For a environmental perspective, emissions from cars lead to global warming, which may have a devastating effect on the planet. Therefore, investing money on public transport is the way to protect the environment and our future.
On the other hand, it is also true that constructing more and wider roads is positive to decrease overcrowding. In fact, apparently massive highways could consist more vehicles than narrow ways. For example, when a road is expanded more lines, the vehicles will have more space especially on rush hours and thereby no longer choke on roads. The other advantage of this method is there are a number of ways to enter the cities when more roads is constructed. This lead to reduce pressure on the main roads.
In conclusion, although build more and expand roads might bring several positive to solve traffic congestion, it seems to me that the expenditure on building train and subway system is the better and sustainable methods.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 5, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...ead of solely using cars or bikes. For a environmental perspective, emissions fr...
^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...to reduce pressure on the main roads. In conclusion, although build more and e...
^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...is the better and sustainable methods.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, first, may, so, therefore, while, for example, in conclusion, in fact, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 24.0651302605 54% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 41.998997996 76% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1492.0 1615.20841683 92% => OK
No of words: 296.0 315.596192385 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.04054054054 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14784890444 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62516304409 2.80592935109 94% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.550675675676 0.561755894193 98% => OK
syllable_count: 458.1 506.74238477 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.5528260869 49.4020404114 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.571428571 106.682146367 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1428571429 20.7667163134 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.21428571429 7.06120827912 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.372584460776 0.244688304435 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.112947597102 0.084324248473 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0887501410494 0.0667982634062 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.194733786994 0.151304729494 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.10536158578 0.056905535591 185% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.0946893788 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 50.2224549098 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.3001002004 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 12.4159519038 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.73 8.58950901804 102% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 78.4519038076 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.